beta
(영문) 인천지방법원 2018.10.25 2018가단231627

대여금

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff was in de facto marital relationship with Nonparty C around 2013, and was in de facto marital relationship with C from around 2015 to May 2017, and the Defendant is the mother of C.

B. Around June 2015, the Defendant, an insurance solicitor, concluded a life insurance contract with ING Life Insurance Co., Ltd., and received KRW 22,90,298 from June 10, 2015 to June 4, 2017 the sum of the premiums paid from the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. Since the Defendant requested to lend a certain amount of money every month under the name of the Defendant to pay the premium for the life insurance contract, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the total amount of the loan amounting to KRW 22,90,298 and delay damages.

B. Selectively, if the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to pay the premium on behalf of the Plaintiff with respect to the amount equivalent to the premium paid by the Plaintiff, it constitutes a violation of the Insurance Business Act and thus the agreement is null and void. Therefore, the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff the amount equivalent to the premium paid by the

3. Determination

A. The plaintiff alleged that he lent money equivalent to the insurance premium to the defendant, but there is no evidence to prove such lending.

(M) In light of the relationship between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and the fact that the Plaintiff, an insurance solicitor, appears to be entitled to receive a lot of allowances due to the conclusion of the Defendant’s insurance contract, the Plaintiff appears to have paid the Defendant’s insurance premium on behalf of the Defendant.

The plaintiff asserts that the agreement to pay the insurance premium on behalf of the defendant is null and void due to the violation of the Insurance Business Act.

Article 98 (4) of the Insurance Business Act shall be engaged in the conclusion or solicitation of insurance contracts.